Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-09-24-Speech-3-100"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080924.16.3-100"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we have a relatively difficult decision with regard to Amendment 138, for which three requests for a split vote have been tabled. I personally tabled an oral amendment to the first part of the amendment, which is included on the voting list and reads: ‘applying the principle that no restriction may be imposed on the fundamental rights and freedoms of end-users’
That is the first oral amendment. Since then, we have been looking for a solution acceptable to the political groups in relation to the third part of the amendment.
I therefore propose a new oral amendment, with the backing of the signatories, including the Chairman of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, Mrs Niebler, and others, which would read: ‘save when public security is threatened where the ruling may be subsequent’. This would replace the third part and clarify matters, as the third part proposed by Mr Bono is ambiguous as regards the exception. By making this clarification, we have a readable and acceptable amendment. Incidentally – for the benefit of Mrs Hieronymi – it has nothing to do with intellectual property, as she was saying."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples